Apple replacement phones... are used phones.

[PeteEU]

There is a brewing scandal coming out of Europe. In Holland Apple has been busted for giving refurbished phones to customers who had to have a defective phone replaced within warranty.

http://www.dutchnews.nl/news/archiv...-apple-to-replace-defect-iphone-with-new-one/

In Denmark, they have just admitted as much in a similar court case. Now this case...is even worse.

Apple violates Danish laws - and is now suing an iPhone user for winning a consumer rights case against the company - Business Insider Nordic

According to Danish law (and EU), if a product fails due to fabrication fault within the first 2 years (Dutch article says 1 year, but that is Apple policy and illegal), the product has to be replaced. The understanding in Scandinavia and standing rule, is that it is replaced with a similar new product.

Now in Denmark there was a guy who got a "lemon" product from Apple (an iPhone) and he under Danish law can get it replaced. Problem is that the replacement he got, was refurbished and that was against Danish law. So he sued, and won.. and guess what Apple did? Sued the guy... wtf?

Apple countersuing Dane who beat it in court | The Post

And in this court, Apple has admitted that if you hand in a broken Apple product that is no fault of you, but the fault of Apple, then Apple will give you a used aka refurbished device back... now talk about sleazy.... Not only did you buy a broken product, but when you expect to get it replaced by a new working product, you actually get a used refurbished product that in some cases also does not work..... the cases and comments about similar experiences with Apple are all over social media.

 

[LowDown]

There is a brewing scandal coming out of Europe. In Holland Apple has been busted for giving refurbished phones to customers who had to have a defective phone replaced within warranty.

Dutch court orders Apple to replace defective iPhone with new, not refurbished, phone - DutchNews.nl

In Denmark, they have just admitted as much in a similar court case. Now this case...is even worse.

Apple violates Danish laws - and is now suing an iPhone user for winning a consumer rights case against the company - Business Insider Nordic

According to Danish law (and EU), if a product fails due to fabrication fault within the first 2 years (Dutch article says 1 year, but that is Apple policy and illegal), the product has to be replaced. The understanding in Scandinavia and standing rule, is that it is replaced with a similar new product.

Now in Denmark there was a guy who got a "lemon" product from Apple (an iPhone) and he under Danish law can get it replaced. Problem is that the replacement he got, was refurbished and that was against Danish law. So he sued, and won.. and guess what Apple did? Sued the guy... wtf?

Apple countersuing Dane who beat it in court | The Post

And in this court, Apple has admitted that if you hand in a broken Apple product that is no fault of you, but the fault of Apple, then Apple will give you a used aka refurbished device back... now talk about sleazy.... Not only did you buy a broken product, but when you expect to get it replaced by a new working product, you actually get a used refurbished product that in some cases also does not work..... the cases and comments about similar experiences with Apple are all over social media.

Where in Dutch law is it mandated that replacement phones have to be new?

 

[OrphanSlug]

Unsure about Dutch Law, but that has more or less been the standard in the US for years. Replacing a phone with Apple (or a Cell Company) would likely result in a "refurbished" phone.

 

[PeteEU]

Where in Dutch law is it mandated that replacement phones have to be new?

No clue, but the courts ruled it that way. The basic EU rule is this

Guarantees, cancelling and returning your purchases - Your Europe

But how on earth can you be backing Apple or any company on this? If you buy a car, that has a fault. You take it back to the dealer and they replace it with another car.. that had been in a crash and been "refurbished".. would you accept that? Of course not. There is an expectation of a working new product when you buy it as such.

 

[ttwtt78640]

There is a brewing scandal coming out of Europe. In Holland Apple has been busted for giving refurbished phones to customers who had to have a defective phone replaced within warranty.

Dutch court orders Apple to replace defective iPhone with new, not refurbished, phone - DutchNews.nl

In Denmark, they have just admitted as much in a similar court case. Now this case...is even worse.

Apple violates Danish laws - and is now suing an iPhone user for winning a consumer rights case against the company - Business Insider Nordic

According to Danish law (and EU), if a product fails due to fabrication fault within the first 2 years (Dutch article says 1 year, but that is Apple policy and illegal), the product has to be replaced. The understanding in Scandinavia and standing rule, is that it is replaced with a similar new product.

Now in Denmark there was a guy who got a "lemon" product from Apple (an iPhone) and he under Danish law can get it replaced. Problem is that the replacement he got, was refurbished and that was against Danish law. So he sued, and won.. and guess what Apple did? Sued the guy... wtf?

Apple countersuing Dane who beat it in court | The Post

And in this court, Apple has admitted that if you hand in a broken Apple product that is no fault of you, but the fault of Apple, then Apple will give you a used aka refurbished device back... now talk about sleazy.... Not only did you buy a broken product, but when you expect to get it replaced by a new working product, you actually get a used refurbished product that in some cases also does not work..... the cases and comments about similar experiences with Apple are all over social media.

I can see this two ways - 1) the law states that warranty replacement must be with a new product and 2) repair of any defect should be an option open to the seller. There is no harm in offering a repaired (refurbished?) product as opposed to fixing the defect in the used product being returned for warranty service. If you return a used X, with some hours/miles on it due to some warranted part's failure, then why should you expect to get a new X as opposed to a used X restored to good working order?

 

[PeteEU]

Unsure about Dutch Law, but that has more or less been the standard in the US for years. Replacing a phone with Apple (or a Cell Company) would likely result in a "refurbished" phone.

That is absolutely illegal in Denmark and many other places.

 

[PeteEU]

I can see this two ways - 1) the law states that warranty replacement must be with a new product and 2) repair of any defect should be an option open to the seller. There is no harm in offering a repaired (refurbished?) product as opposed to fixing the defect in the used product being returned for warranty service. I you return a used X, with some hours/miles on it, due to some warranted part's failure then why should you expect to get a new X as opposed to a used X restored to good working order?

the law states

If goods you bought anywhere in the EU turn out to be faulty or do not look or work as advertised, the seller must repair or replace them free of charge or give you a price reduction or a full refund.

Each country has their own extra laws, like in Denmark when a replacement item has to be new also. Also "replace them free of charge", is seen by everyone as "getting a new one". That is the standard practice everywhere. I bought a Phillips TV a few months back, it was defective out of the box. I went back to the store, they looked at it, and said fine, take a new one. And yes it was a brand new unopened box. That is how companies usually do business in Europe and always have. So there is a very clear expectation everywhere, that if a faulty product is replaced by the seller, then it is a new one.. not some used repaired crap.

Also the point is, Apple are now suing the guy for winning the court case against them for breaking Danish consumer law... and they are most likely going to lose it.

 

[ttwtt78640]

No clue, but the courts ruled it that way. The basic EU rule is this

Guarantees, cancelling and returning your purchases - Your Europe

But how on earth can you be backing Apple or any company on this? If you buy a car, that has a fault. You take it back to the dealer and they replace it with another car.. that had been in a crash and been "refurbished".. would you accept that? Of course not. There is an expectation of a working new product when you buy it as such.

Nonsense - you should have two options: wait while your phone (or car) is fixed under warranty or accept an equivalent replacement phone (or car) in good working order instead. Why should you expect a new phone (or car) when you have a warranty problem with a (now) used phone (or car)?

 

[OrphanSlug]

That is absolutely illegal in Denmark and many other places.

Wow, very nice. With my 15 year old daughter utterly destroying a phone almost every year, that would be nice if it were the same here in the US.

 

[ttwtt78640]

the law states



Each country has their own extra laws, like in Denmark when a replacement item has to be new also. Also "replace them free of charge", is seen by everyone as "getting a new one". That is the standard practice everywhere. I bought a Phillips TV a few months back, it was defective out of the box. I went back to the store, they looked at it, and said fine, take a new one. And yes it was a brand new unopened box. That is how companies usually do business in Europe and always have. So there is a very clear expectation everywhere, that if a faulty product is replaced by the seller, then it is a new one.. not some used repaired crap.

Also the point is, Apple are now suing the guy for winning the court case against them for breaking Danish consumer law... and they are most likely going to lose it.

The EU law says repair or replace with new item - if I were Apple then I would drop the or replace "option" in the EU and tell the customer that repair will take about 60 days. I can see immediate replacement if the item returned was new and in "right out of the box" condition but why would you expect that same treatment if the returned TV (phone or car) was a year (or more) old and/or in "right out of the trash can" condition?

 

[ludin]

There is a brewing scandal coming out of Europe. In Holland Apple has been busted for giving refurbished phones to customers who had to have a defective phone replaced within warranty.

Dutch court orders Apple to replace defective iPhone with new, not refurbished, phone - DutchNews.nl

In Denmark, they have just admitted as much in a similar court case. Now this case...is even worse.

Apple violates Danish laws - and is now suing an iPhone user for winning a consumer rights case against the company - Business Insider Nordic

According to Danish law (and EU), if a product fails due to fabrication fault within the first 2 years (Dutch article says 1 year, but that is Apple policy and illegal), the product has to be replaced. The understanding in Scandinavia and standing rule, is that it is replaced with a similar new product.

Now in Denmark there was a guy who got a "lemon" product from Apple (an iPhone) and he under Danish law can get it replaced. Problem is that the replacement he got, was refurbished and that was against Danish law. So he sued, and won.. and guess what Apple did? Sued the guy... wtf?

Apple countersuing Dane who beat it in court | The Post

And in this court, Apple has admitted that if you hand in a broken Apple product that is no fault of you, but the fault of Apple, then Apple will give you a used aka refurbished device back... now talk about sleazy.... Not only did you buy a broken product, but when you expect to get it replaced by a new working product, you actually get a used refurbished product that in some cases also does not work..... the cases and comments about similar experiences with Apple are all over social media.

Umm this is just procedure for all tech companies. any type of replacement part is a refurbished phone.
or similar.

 

[humbolt]

I can see this two ways - 1) the law states that warranty replacement must be with a new product and 2) repair of any defect should be an option open to the seller. There is no harm in offering a repaired (refurbished?) product as opposed to fixing the defect in the used product being returned for warranty service. If you return a used X, with some hours/miles on it due to some warranted part's failure, then why should you expect to get a new X as opposed to a used X restored to good working order?

My questions as well. Many warranties are pro-rated based on use. I don't know if that's the case here, but it's not unreasonable on it's face. I can see that if an iphone fails shortly after purchase, one might reasonably expect a new replacement. After significant use? - I'm not so sure the expectation of a new replacement is entirely reasonable. However, the law in Denmark appears to demand a new replacement. So reasonable or not, Apple will likely have to pony up some new phones. Apple has nearly $300 billion they're sitting on, so if the cost of doing business there requires replacement, I won't weep for Apple.

 

[ttwtt78640]

My questions as well. Many warranties are pro-rated based on use. I don't know if that's the case here, but it's not unreasonable on it's face. I can see that if an iphone fails shortly after purchase, one might reasonably expect a new replacement. After significant use? - I'm not so sure the expectation of a new replacement is entirely reasonable. However, the law in Denmark appears to demand a new replacement. So reasonable or not, Apple will likely have to pony up some new phones. Apple has nearly $300 billion they're sitting on, so if the cost of doing business there requires replacement, I won't weep for Apple.

The EU law requires repair or new replacement - Apple should simply get customer's to accept, by written agreement, refurbished replacement as a "faster method" of repair. Apple can offer two EU compliant repair options A) we will send your phone to a repair facility, have it repaired (refurbished) and send it back to you taking about 60 days or B) we will swap it for a different, yet equivalent, already repaired (refurbished) phone right now.

 

[PeteEU]

Wow, very nice. With my 15 year old daughter utterly destroying a phone almost every year, that would be nice if it were the same here in the US.

No no.. this is about a fabrication warranty. So your daughter destroying her phone would not be covered. If her phone had a defect, like a screen that glitches or something similar that is a fabrication fault.. then the warranty comes into effect.

You buy a new iPhone.. it does not turn on.. warranty clicks in.
You buy a new iPhone.. and drive your car over it.. warranty does not click in.

 

[PeteEU]

Nonsense - you should have two options: wait while your phone (or car) is fixed under warranty or accept an equivalent replacement phone (or car) in good working order instead. Why should you expect a new phone (or car) when you have a warranty problem with a (now) used phone (or car)?

It comes down to time in my opinion.

If I go in and buy a new TV, or Phone or whatever, and it breaks after a month because of a fabrication fault.. then hell yea I expect it to get fixed and if not, get the damn thing replaced with a NEW one.. not one that was refurbished and been used for a year by someone else.

Now if I go buy myself an iPhone or whatever and it breaks within the warranty but after a considerable amount of time.. then well we can discuss it.

For example... 3 months ago I bought a new Lenovo 10 inch tablet for a client. We took it home and as soon as we opened the box, we saw that it was broken.. not assembled correctly. There was a gap on the side, as if the two pieces of plastic had not been put together correctly.

Now in this case... you go back to the store the day after, do you expect to a refurbished used Lenovo tablet, or a new one? You expect a new one.. it is a clear manufacturing fault. Now must companies just give you a new one... it is faster, cheaper and easier for them.

I expect if I have a faulty product, that is not faulty due to usage or external influences.. that this product either gets fixed, replaced (and by that I mean a new one), or reduced in price/get my money back. You bought the product as new, and you expect the replacement item to be used?!?!? Might as well have bought the used / refurbished one in the first place then!

 

[PeteEU]

Umm this is just procedure for all tech companies. any type of replacement part is a refurbished phone.
or similar.

Not the tech companies I have worked with.. even Dell. Dell's policy (which is idiotic) is to try to repair the product at almost all costs instead of replacing it. That is fine and within the law. If they finally do replace the product then I have always gotten a new product, not a refurbished one. Same with Lenovo, LG, Sony, Samsung, Nokia and so on and so on.

A good story about Dell. Bought a Dell tablet (Windows 8). It broke after a day as it would not charge. First I used their reclamation service and sent it in for repair. They said they fixed it..they did not. Sent it in again and again it came back unfixed. They sent a replacement charger even though I said it was the USB port not the charger that was the problem. Finally after 3 weeks, they actually sent out a guy to replace the motherboard / USB port and finally it worked. Now this tablet.. cost 239 euros, and all the back and fourth and sending out a repair guy cost them over 500 Euros. I told them from the start, I would accept that they just replaced it with a new one.. would have been faster and cheaper, but no that was their policy.. try to fix, and only if it was impossible, then replace with a NEW one.. not refurbished, but new.

 

[PeteEU]

The EU law says repair or replace with new item - if I were Apple then I would drop the or replace "option" in the EU and tell the customer that repair will take about 60 days. I can see immediate replacement if the item returned was new and in "right out of the box" condition but why would you expect that same treatment if the returned TV (phone or car) was a year (or more) old and/or in "right out of the trash can" condition?

Yes it is up to Apple how to proceed, even in Denmark.. They could just repair the devices, but as soon as they "replace" them, then they get into hot water by not giving out new similar devices. The law is very favorable to the company involved, as there is nothing that forces them to replace them with in reasonable time. They can continue to try to fix the product for weeks and months.. the consumer cant demand immediate replacement... money back sure, but not replacement.

 

[ludin]

Not the tech companies I have worked with.. even Dell. Dell's policy (which is idiotic) is to try to repair the product at almost all costs instead of replacing it. That is fine and within the law. If they finally do replace the product then I have always gotten a new product, not a refurbished one. Same with Lenovo, LG, Sony, Samsung, Nokia and so on and so on.

lol what do you think they replace parts with? they don't replace them with new ones they give you a refurbished on. If your hard drive fails or something then they give you a refurbished drive.
the motherboards that get replaced are all refurbished. why? because that is what they get back from the supplier.

A good story about Dell. Bought a Dell tablet (Windows 8). It broke after a day as it would not charge. First I used their reclamation service and sent it in for repair. They said they fixed it..they did not. Sent it in again and again it came back unfixed. They sent a replacement charger even though I said it was the USB port not the charger that was the problem. Finally after 3 weeks, they actually sent out a guy to replace the motherboard / USB port and finally it worked. Now this tablet.. cost 239 euros, and all the back and fourth and sending out a repair guy cost them over 500 Euros. I told them from the start, I would accept that they just replaced it with a new one.. would have been faster and cheaper, but no that was their policy.. try to fix, and only if it was impossible, then replace with a NEW one.. not refurbished, but new.

yep and he replaced everything with refurbished parts.

 

[ludin]

Yes it is up to Apple how to proceed, even in Denmark.. They could just repair the devices, but as soon as they "replace" them, then they get into hot water by not giving out new similar devices. The law is very favorable to the company involved, as there is nothing that forces them to replace them with in reasonable time. They can continue to try to fix the product for weeks and months.. the consumer cant demand immediate replacement... money back sure, but not replacement.

It is a similar device. The guy traded in a used broken iphone and got a working iphone in it's place.
so it was a similar device in fact the refurbished one works just as good.

I wanted a new phone a while ago. and I really wanted that galaxy s3 which was brand new at the time.
I bought a refurbished one for 20 dollars. It has worked really well for the past almost 5 years now.

i had no issues with it at all.

 

[LowDown]

No clue, but the courts ruled it that way. The basic EU rule is this

Guarantees, cancelling and returning your purchases - Your Europe

But how on earth can you be backing Apple or any company on this? If you buy a car, that has a fault. You take it back to the dealer and they replace it with another car.. that had been in a crash and been "refurbished".. would you accept that? Of course not. There is an expectation of a working new product when you buy it as such.

So, the deal is that the phone you want to replace has to be pretty new? Under 14 days according to what you linked. You can't use it for 2 years and then expect a new one to replace it if it breaks?

The article linked in the OP says 2 years. Use a phone for 2 years and then expect a new one if it breaks? That doesn't seem very fair.

I know if I drove a car for 2 years and then took it in for a defect expecting a new one to replace it all I'd get from the dealer is a horse laugh.

 

[Mach]

I can see both sides. I think if its 90 days or less old, you are entitled to new or money back. Past 90 days they can repair (long time), or offer refurbished (still warrantied identical to the phone you purchased). As to Danish law being different...that's part of doing business overseas, and conflicts with the legal system are part of the process of how bad laws get identified, or bad business practice gets a light shown on it, etc.

 

[PeteEU]

So, the deal is that the phone you want to replace has to be pretty new? Under 14 days according to what you linked. You can't use it for 2 years and then expect a new one to replace it if it breaks?

Yes and no. The normal rule is that with manufacturing faults, it is up to the supplier to fix the problem.. by fixing it. If they then say they will replace the item, then one has to expect they replace it with a new functioning item, not an used one. The company, in this case.. Apple, can always try to fix the problem. But if they then tell you, that they will replace the item then there is (in Denmark and many other places) an expectation (and in Denmark a legal requirement) that it is a new product and not a used one.

The article linked in the OP says 2 years. Use a phone for 2 years and then expect a new one if it breaks? That doesn't seem very fair.

No.. if it breaks with in the 2 years because of a fabrication fault, then yes. If it breaks because of your own stupidity then no.

I know if I drove a car for 2 years and then took it in for a defect expecting a new one to replace it all I'd get from the dealer is a horse laugh.

If you drove a car for almost 2 years and it broke down due to a manufacturing fault in say the drive shaft... as it was "pre existing condition" .. then yes the company should either fix the problem, or replace the car as a whole. Now with a car they most likely will fix the problem before replacing the car.

 

[PeteEU]

yep and he replaced everything with refurbished parts.

Hell no. The motherboard came out of its official box and everything.. unless they repack in original boxes their refurbished stuff with official seals... that is illegal all over Europe.

 

[PeteEU]

It is a similar device. The guy traded in a used broken iphone and got a working iphone in it's place.
so it was a similar device in fact the refurbished one works just as good.

I wanted a new phone a while ago. and I really wanted that galaxy s3 which was brand new at the time.
I bought a refurbished one for 20 dollars. It has worked really well for the past almost 5 years now.

i had no issues with it at all.

1) It is not a similar device.. one is new, the other one is used.
2) Refurbished in quite a few cases in Denmark.. do not work and have to be replaced several times. This case has brought up a lot of similar cases.
3) Not saying refurbished is bad.. but when you are sold a "new" device then you expect that it is new and any replacement that you get because of a fault.. is also new. Basically if he wanted a refurbished used device then he would have bought one at the start..

 

[ludin]

1) It is not a similar device.. one is new, the other one is used.

Once he opened the packaged and started using it and if he did use it then it was indeed used.

2) Refurbished in quite a few cases in Denmark.. do not work and have to be replaced several times. This case has brought up a lot of similar cases.
3) Not saying refurbished is bad.. but when you are sold a "new" device then you expect that it is new and any replacement that you get because of a fault.. is also new. Basically if he wanted a refurbished used device then he would have bought one at the start..

In the US once you open the package the item is considered used. You can no longer sell it as a new item.
basically Denmark as a 2 year warranty on all new consumer goods.

I don't see much room for apple here unless they decide to just pull out of Denmark.